|
Xandu posted:His point was the UN is not a monolithic organization that can just act. It requires sovereign states to get together and agree. I think his point more so was that the UN is severely crippled/ineffective because 2 nations with veto power are working against what the UN should stand for/the democratic ideals of the western world- which ties in with what you're saying that all the nations on the SC need to agree or it's bust. edit: y'll should stop comparing Libya to Iraq and Afghanistan, it's not at all a good analogy in any shape or form. Lascivious Sloth fucked around with this message at 05:34 on Mar 18, 2011 |
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 05:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 03:56 |
|
|
Competition posted:^^^^ No-one has predicted a quick painless victory, they have however said that your comparisons to a forever war in Afghan/Iraq are incorrect. It's impossible to tell what is correct and what isn't. There's zero reliable public information from Libya - what truth there is is drowned under rumours and propaganda. This makes it very much impossible to assess the forces and tactics used by either side, or just how many people really support or oppose Gaddafi. Hopefully western military intelligence services are better aware of the situation, but I don't think we are going to find out what really happened until after the war is over.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 05:33
|
|
|
farraday posted:You completely ignored the very idea that civilian populations in reconquered cities might in any way matter until now. You reduced to to a two dimensional problem and said it would require western military intervention on the ground because (obviously) it is impossible for the rebels to take cities. western military invention on the ground is going to take place with the introduction of any serious amount of western airpower or the placing of any hope of an organized rebel force retaking the country. That is generally how we work. quote:My recollection of events at the time is that the NC took Afghanistan before anyone in the West sent any substantial number of ground troops there. Feel free to provide evidence to the contrary. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_%282001%E2%80%93present%29#2001:_Initial_attack it's also worth noting that we intentionally incurred significant risk during the first few weeks because the decision was made to move in advance of when larger ground elements could be made available. Expected casualty rates were 50+% (according to George Tenet). We are likely not willing to incur such rates on behalf of Libbya Unfortunately, I think many people in this thread are predisposed toward rejecting anything I might say due. At the least I would check out this well respected blog run by a scholar (and veteran) over at CNAS - generally considered the launching point for many Obama Administration foreign policy types. http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama in particular http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2011/03/war.html as well as the comments section, which generally tends to be better informed on security issues given the readership
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 05:33
|
|
|
Happydayz posted:trained light infantry force vs untrained armed civilians with no command and control. Sounds pretty simple to me. Not sure if Gadaffis troops are from the area, but I think the key factor is knowing the stack of crates next to the building exit on the terrorist site of de_dust. That's kinda the key advantage of local guerrillas.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 05:33
|
|
|
Happydayz posted:in particular http://www.cnas.org/blogs/abumuqawama/2011/03/war.html quote:Odd how several years ago, a multitude of Libyan suicide bombers were blowing up US soldiers and innocent people all over Iraq, and yet here we are providing a no fly zone in Libya. Mind you, it wasn't Gaddafi that sent those suicide bombers to Iraq, although he has American blood on his hands too. From a practical point of view, perhaps letting them fight it out was the best option? Maybe we should ask a US soldier who was wounded by a Libyan suicide bomber, or ask the parents of a dead soldier who was killed by these irhabists? Yes, very educated. In any case Happydayz can you explain to me why you think the libyan forces are so well trained presumably more accurate coalition bombing will have no effect on their morale?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 05:41
|
|
|
Thunderstorm posted:Not sure if Gadaffis troops are from the area, but I think the key factor is knowing the stack of crates next to the building exit on the terrorist site of de_dust. That's kinda the key advantage of local guerrillas. It's a mistake to think that urban insurgencies are successful just due to the spontaneous resistance of the locals. The Iraq insurgency for example was first hubbed around regime loyalists who had specifically trained for this, and later transitioned to organized insurgents with coherent training and command and control. Civilians taking up arms and fighting organized militaries a la Les Miserables generally do not end well. I would also caution against being too confident that former conscripts are somehow comparably trained to regime elements that are still loyal to the country. I'm willing to bet that Libyan conscripts are more akin to North Korean conscripts vs the German Bundeswehr conscripts. Many dictatorships will identify core military elements to receive actual useful training while the conscripted forces act to fill other social functions (pool of labor / loyalty building / inherent reserve force) quote:Yes, very educated. It's an open blog. But also one where the likes of Gian Gentile regularly engage with commentators and most people there have actual military or security backgrounds. For the record - there is a good earlier post there which shows that Libya provided a significantly disproportionate share of foreign fighters to AQI in Iraq, and that western Libya was where most of them originated. This is likely not relevant to the discussion at hand but still worth keeping in the back of your mind. quote:In any case Happydayz can you explain to me why you think the libyan forces are so well trained presumably more accurate coalition bombing will have no effect on their morale? and I said this where? Coalition airpower can cause tremendous havoc to Libyan ground forces, in particular any armor or vehicles. But at best that will just arrest their momentum, not roll it back. Airpower does not win wars, boots on ground do. And unfortunately we are relying on a rather poor source of these. Happydayz fucked around with this message at 05:45 on Mar 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 05:42
|
|
|
Happydayz posted:
Well firstly, Afghanistan and Iraq are not apt comparisons or similar in any way. Secondly, I think the biggest problem with your viewpoint is that you (and I) don't know the capability of the rebels right now, and lastly, and most importantly, the situation in Libya is far removed from any comparison you've made. There are many factors to consider that really do put the rebels in the better position right now. 1. Libyan's male adult citizens are all conscripts 2. The biggest advantages Gad forces had over the rebels has been cut-off: airforce, navy, artillery, and desert tank warfare. All easily shutdown by the NFZ. 3. The spirit of the revolution. This isn't a phoney-uprising, it's a movement by the people. 4. Urban warfare capabiltiies of the rebels and improvement of these abilities and organization over time. 5. Overestimating the resolve of the military to kill their own people and not defect over time. I haven't read anything you've posted refuting these points. Lascivious Sloth fucked around with this message at 05:50 on Mar 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 05:45
|
|
|
Happydayz posted:and I said this where? "The Libyan airforce are dropping dumb bombs and not exactly highly trained. Do you really think that their air power was effective? How many rebels do you think actually died or were wounded by Libyan air power? Read the New Yorker article I posted - the effectiveness of Libyan air power was not in its actual kinetic effects, but rather through the incompetence/negligence of the rebels." So, the libyan airforce was completely ineffective at doing damage to the rebels. Agreed. Is your argument then that the air attacks had absolutely no effect? I doubt it, you're clutching that article like a life preserver and it makes it pretty clear they fled because of the air attacks. Now then, obviously you agree coalition air strikes will be far more effective, and yet you've argued it's going to just be "trained light infantry force vs untrained armed civilians" and can only end one way. You have amazing faith in the quality of libyan armed forces Happy, did you help train them or something?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 05:52
|
|
|
Lascivious Sloth posted:I think his point more so was that the UN is severely crippled/ineffective because 2 nations with veto power are working against what the UN should stand for/the democratic ideals of the western world- which ties in with what you're saying that all the nations on the SC need to agree or it's bust. Actually my point was more about how the UN is not a monolithic organisation, and hence when people criticise the UN for sitting on it rear end or whatever, they're missing the point. While I sympathise with your sentiments on members from democratic countries, the UN Security Council is more about being representative of power in the world - both economic and military. That's why there's talk of promoting countries like India and Brazil to permanent members of the council.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 05:53
|
|
|
Gonkish posted:At this point I just want to see the fucker strung up by the Libyans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 05:54
|
|
|
farraday posted:"The Libyan airforce are dropping dumb bombs and not exactly highly trained. Do you really think that their air power was effective? How many rebels do you think actually died or were wounded by Libyan air power? Read the New Yorker article I posted - the effectiveness of Libyan air power was not in its actual kinetic effects, but rather through the incompetence/negligence of the rebels." Yes, they fled because of the air attacks. Not because of its kinetic effects (see first paragraph you quoted), but rather because of their own lack of professionalism/skill/competence/etc. I'm not quite sure why you posted this. quote:Now then, obviously you agree coalition air strikes will be far more effective, and yet you've argued it's going to just be "trained light infantry force vs untrained armed civilians" and can only end one way. Yes, if they fight in the cities it is unlikely that coalition airpower will be brought to bear. It would be exceptionally difficult to call down air strikes in such an environment and would require putting US forward air controllers in an incredibly risky urban environment where there would be a high risk of capture. Not to say that we wouldn't do this, but if we did you can again bet that we would want to have a large ground presence readily available to back them up. quote:You have amazing faith in the quality of libyan armed forces Happy, did you help train them or something? I am skeptical of people who think that this will be easy, short, and done entirely from the air. quote:1. Libyan's male adult citizens are all conscripts I've addressed 1, 2, and 4. 3 and 5 are the intangibles. I'll just quote what I said in another thread: http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3397841&pagenumber=1#lastpost quote:Also a lot depends on Gadaffi himself and whether he wants to go for broke and take Benghazi, or whether he wants to consolidate what he has retaken. A potential game changer is the status of the civilians in the recaptured areas and whether they will now rise up and eject regime forces, and whether those regime forces - who are probably not the cream of the crop - will stand and fight against their own civilians. but like I said a page or two ago, this means that you are placing the hope for this operation almost entirely on factors that you cannot control (the status of the people in the cities and that of the non-elite/non-core regime militaries). We've heard this story before - it was called Operation Iraqi Freedom. I think it is easy to understand why retreading this story again is making many people nervous, especially when it means that if your hope is misplaced our Plan B involves a large scale and indefinite military operation in North Africa.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:00
|
|
|
They've already beaten these exact same forces in the cities Happydayz. What they haven't done well at is receiving artillery and airstrikes, which is no longer a major issue. Why you don't get this is frankly confusing. If the libyan forces try and concentrate they're going to get hosed up by airpower, if they try and bunker down in cities with hostile populations they're going to get overthrown. If they try and advance they're going to get bombed You think the combat is between Free Libyan militias in Benghazi and Libyan troops. It isn't. It's between the populations in the cities they take refuge in and whatever quality troops are available. Get that through your head and stop making stupid comments about how trained light infantry will beat civilians with guns because, I mean, they just will you know. And I'm so impressed with your post about how civilian populations could be important maybe somehow well after I made that point in this thread in response to your earlier "hur conventional battle" comments.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:08
|
|
|
Farraday - you are assuming that what happened initially during the uprising is the same as what is happening now. The first uprisings against Gadaffi were of citizens and of military forces generally not taking action, a la Egypt. What has happened since then is loyalist forces retaking cities and clearing away opposition blocking them. This is a different type of fight.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:17
|
|
|
Happydayz posted:We've heard this story before - it was called Operation Iraqi Freedom. This is why you are wrong. Operation Iraqi Freedom is nothing like what is happening in Libya. The Iraqis did not revolt against Hussein. The country was not on the verge of civil war and unrest. The UN did not step in, vote, and install an internationally, and most importantly, locally rejoiced military intervention. There is a huge difference. quote:They've already beaten these exact same forces in the cities Happydayz. What they haven't done well at is receiving artillery and airstrikes, which is no longer a major issue. Why you don't get this is frankly confusing. Pretty much this is the biggest factor. He doesn't understand how the NFZ has basically saved the rebels and put them on equal footing with superior numbers and morale. Lascivious Sloth fucked around with this message at 06:24 on Mar 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:20
|
|
|
Happydayz posted:Farraday - you are assuming that what happened initially during the uprising is the same as what is happening now. You don't even know what happened in Banghazi at the start of this do you? I mean really, you're completely clueless. You literally believe it's a straight up campaign from Benghazi to Tripoli between your hypothetically trained light infantry and armed civilians in a route march. Go back to reading your blog comments about how it's a shame new york times journalists aren't killed and how we shouldn't bother helping these libyan suicide bombers, some one in there may have an educated opinion.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:22
|
|
|
Happydayz posted:Farraday - you are assuming that what happened initially during the uprising is the same as what is happening now. Except that the after the NFZ is imposed, the status quo will return to the situation in the first part of the uprising - Ghadaffi forces in cities, at risk of being overrun or ejected by civilian rioters and (now armed) outright Rebel forces - except that now they have absolutely no way of reinforcing themselves or retaking cities that fall to the Rebels in the future without incurring horrific losses from UN airpower.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:22
|
|
|
Bahrain rounds up the opposition leaders in a night raid.http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/as-bahrain-arrests-the-opposition-leaders-no-one-is-left-for-dialogue/2011/03/17/ABhiJ6m_story.html posted:MANAMA, BAHRAIN — American calls for Bahrain’s government to negotiate with protesters fell on deaf ears Thursday after the arrest of seven movement leaders in early-morning raids left it unclear who could speak for the opposition.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:30
|
|
|
Lascivious Sloth posted:There are many factors to consider that really do put the rebels in the better position right now. quote:2. The biggest advantages Gad forces had over the rebels has been cut-off: airforce, navy, artillery, and desert tank warfare. All easily shutdown by the NFZ. quote:3. The spirit of the revolution. This isn't a phoney-uprising, it's a movement by the people. quote:4. Urban warfare capabiltiies of the rebels and improvement of these abilities and organization over time. quote:5. Overestimating the resolve of the military to kill their own people and not defect over time.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:31
|
|
|
It seems like, from a purely idealogical viewpoint, the UN is trying to level the playing field with the NFZ. So idealogically, they aren't directly becoming involved in the situation. There's an attitude of being able to dust their hands off and whistle back to whatever work they were doing before bombs were dropped.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:32
|
|
|
eggyolk posted:It seems like, from a purely idealogical viewpoint, the UN is trying to level the playing field with the NFZ. So idealogically, they aren't directly becoming involved in the situation. There's an attitude of being able to dust their hands off and whistle back to whatever work they were doing before bombs were dropped. No, the mandate allows the use of all available means to protect civilians. This can be interpreted in many ways but will likely involve air-to-ground attacks against Libyan ground forces, especially if Gadaffi has his forces continue to push towards Benghazi.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:43
|
|
|
I think a key factor will be the desert environment, with large distances between cities and only single route highway access that will work against any troop or armour movements of Gad forces to reinforce or resupply. It's pretty much divide and conquer for the rebels.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:48
|
|
|
Zappatista posted:Although I wonder how much of a precedent this could set for similar situations (who am I kidding...what other brutally repressive pariah states not called North Korea are out there?) Not likely, considering most of the likely targets would not be states that have alienated the entire world like Libya. The only non-North Korea candidate that I could think of that would even be conceivable is Burma, and they're a Chinese client state and China would never allow Western troops in Burma.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:49
|
|
|
Yes, I assume that's whats going to happen considering the loose wording. It's hard to fault China and Russia from abstaining since it's obviously going to escalate into something more than is implied by "no fly zone." Something tells me though that the whole approach will be done with a sort of altruistic peace keeper innocence under the pretext of "we'll shoot down anything in the air, regardless of who it belongs to, even though we know that innocent civilians don't have aircraft. oh and we'll be running a full-scale air-ground assault on Ghaddafi but that's still part of the non-meddling, totally impartial no-fly zone thing still
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:51
|
|
|
If I'm reading this article correctly, Bahrain is removing Lulu Roundabout (where the protesters were gathered) and replacing it with traffic lights. Because you know, they can't protest without a roundabout.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:54
|
|
|
Lascivious Sloth posted:I think a key factor will be the desert environment, with large distances between cities and only single route highway access that will work against any troop or armour movements of Gad forces to reinforce or resupply. It's pretty much divide and conquer for the rebels. I think there are two big pivot points that will make themselves clear in the next 1-3 days: 1) Will Gadafi commit his forces to retaking Benghazi? 2) Will civilian uprisings in recaptured cities be sufficient in quality+quantity to overwhelm security forces. If Gadafi commits to taking Benghazi he runs the serious risk of losing his most loyal military units to coalition aircraft. If he instead concentrates on preserving/protecting his force he can keep these elements for later. Either point can become a game changer. If neither materialize I suspect this will likely turn into a protracted affair. The divide between the highways in and of themselves is not a game changer. It will complicate Gadafi's ability to move armor and artillery between the cities. However his infantry and police units will still likely have freedom of movement.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:55
|
|
|
Patter Song posted:Not likely, considering most of the likely targets would not be states that have alienated the entire world like Libya. The only non-North Korea candidate that I could think of that would even be conceivable is Burma, and they're a Chinese client state and China would never allow Western troops in Burma. Côte d'Ivoire seems like a possible contender depending on what happens there. eggyolk posted:It's hard to fault China and Russia from abstaining since it's obviously going to escalate into something more than is implied by "no fly zone." You really can. Their intentions aren't as altruistic as they may seem. Happydayz posted:I think there are two big pivot points that will make themselves clear in the next 1-3 days: I actually agree with you for once. The next few days will probably shape or give away how the next weeks and months will go down. quote:The divide between the highways in and of themselves is not a game changer. It will complicate Gadafi's ability to move armor and artillery between the cities. However his infantry and police units will still likely have freedom of movement. Well we agree on some things at least. Lascivious Sloth fucked around with this message at 06:59 on Mar 18, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:57
|
|
|
eggyolk posted:Something tells me though that the whole approach will be done with a sort of altruistic peace keeper innocence under the pretext of "we'll shoot down anything in the air, regardless of who it belongs to, even though we know that innocent civilians don't have aircraft. oh and we'll be running a full-scale air-ground assault on Ghaddafi but that's still part of the non-meddling, totally impartial no-fly zone thing still I don't see why it needs to be tiptoed around. Ghadaffi was burning bound prisoners alive and shooting up crowds with ZSU's - gently caress pretending to be impartial. If he wants to have a civil war and break all his toys rather than share, he gets to deal with the rest of the world slapping the poo poo out of him. The minute the Rebels start lining up conscientious objector in their ranks and shooting them in the back of the head, sure, expand the NFZ's rules to them too. But we shouldn't have to shy away from saying "the UN is enforcing the NFZ because Ghadaffi is a loving animal".
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 06:59
|
|
|
Lascivious Sloth posted:I actually agree with you for once. The next few days will probably shape or give away how the next weeks and months will go down. hah. Well we've moved past the stage of what we should do to what we are actually doing. In that sense everyone is in the same boat in hoping that Gadaffi commits a few massive gently caress-ups or that the rebels gain sufficient momentum off of the symbolism of a No-Fly-Zone
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 07:05
|
|
|
White House briefed US Senators on NFZ plans.http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/03/17/inside_classified_hill_briefing_administration_spells_out_war_plan_for_libya?sms_ss=twitter&at_xt=4d82de1b1d470f0f,0 posted:Several administration officials held a classified briefing for all senators on Thursday afternoon in the bowels of the Capitol building, leaving lawmakers convinced President Barack Obama is ready to attack Libya but wondering if it isn't too late to help the rebels there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 07:21
|
|
|
Good to see McCain wants to start another war. Whoopie, we all gonna die!
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 07:22
|
|
|
God, the US should really just leave this to the EU and AL. Those Republican senators are like children.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 07:28
|
|
|
Lascivious Sloth posted:Côte d'Ivoire seems like a possible contender depending on what happens there. No one (except France) wants to intervene in Sub-Saharan Africa, and even in France's case, it's because it loves playing big brother to its former colonial possessions.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 07:30
|
|
|
Everyone has been having a go at it, so here's my take on what the no-fly zone means for the Libyans (apologies, it got a bit long). Hopefully I'm not too wrong: I don't think anyone here is comparing a no-fly zone to some kind of magic wand that the rebels are going to be able to wave around and make Gaddafi's forces disappear. Rather it's something that gives them a morale boost and will keep some of his forces at bay, allowing them to train and re-arm, maybe kick the army out of their cities and perhaps encourage more defections. I actually think some of you guys are right in saying that the civilian rebels, conscripts or not, are poorly trained - they've been constantly shooting off their guns (wasting ammo whenever something happens that excites them) but they probably don't know how to use them properly, and they don't really have anyone who can come up with a strategy (the military rebels would be the most help here, but they advanced too quickly to Bin Jawad while the military was still reorganizing and planning their next move). I remember reading that quite a few of the wounds they've received were from friendly fire too. They need the time this will provide to become an actual fighting force. Not that I think they're incompetent or anything, the Libyans certainly proved they are willing to fight when their backs were against the wall, they're just mostly poorly trained, overly-enthusiastic young men who got caught up in the idea of a glorious revolution for their country. If you want to go with an Afghan analogy (not the war itself, just a similiarty I think is apt), the Afghan National Army is recruiting heavily from the civilian population and gives them an eight week crash course before graduating them. Many of the men end up running away when they enter their first engagement, and many simply refuse to fight, instead hiding under cover. Many enter the ANA for the same reasons the Libyan youth go to fight - to protect their homeland. The reality of the situation doesn't really sink in until they're actually in a firefight. The key difference between Afghanistan and Libya is that this isn't just a job, it's a fight for survival. At this point if they throw down their weapons and run, they know Gaddafi will come after them. They were able to retreat from Ras Lanuf, but they can't go much further back than Ajdabiya or Benghazi. We saw in Zawiya that when they have nowhere to go and no choice but to fight, they actually do pretty well. Hopefully with training and better weapons they do even better. Personally, I think it's going to take a while, on the order of weeks (if not months), for the situation in Libya to be resolved, which is actually pretty good when you consider that civil wars generally take much longer. The opposition has a whole list of things they need to do - getting supply routes set up from Tobruk to Benghazi to Ajdabiya, fortifying their positions, training and equipping their rebel army, not to mention they've got to find a way to keep their infrastructure from crumbling so people can actually live/feed themselves, all these things require time that before today they simply didn't have. They can't just grab a bunch of guns and RPGs and start marching towards Tripoli just yet - at this point that would at best result in temporary gains, at worst be a one-sided massacre. Of course, there's a bunch of wild cards here - I'm assuming (hoping) there isn't any escalation in the foreign intervention, which might be unrealistic, Gaddafi can still force the rebels to act prematurely if he or his commander) are smart about it, how the rebels will fare against tanks/artillery, are Gaddafi's troops going to consolidate their gains, will NATO be sharing the intel on troop movements with the rebels (they do have AWACS doing 24h surveillance), what the cities in the west will do (most likely they will side with the rebels, but then again they may have had their fill of fighting and a lot of people have been arrested/disappeared), how long can their resources hold out (food, ammunition, even fuel is going to get more limited as time goes on), will the rebels be able to use their air power, what kind of weapons is Egypt supplying them with (from what I heard it was just light weaponry, but there was talk about buying heavier stuff), etc. All of these factors, coupled with the lack of reliable information coming out of Libya make it really hard to predict what's actually going to happen. The next few days will give us a better understanding of what's going on, and will be going on in Libya and how much of an effect the UN resolution will have, but in the end I think that the greatest benefit the no-fly (and no-drive) zone offers the Libyans, aside from averting civilian casualties, is that it gives them a chance they didn't have before today to get a second wind. What they do with that is up to them.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 07:31
|
|
|
Ok, pages of speculation on what's going to happen, but what are the Libyan people's reactions to this decision? I'm totally stoked, btw.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 07:35
|
|
|
pwnyXpress posted:Ok, pages of speculation on what's going to happen, but what are the Libyan people's reactions to this decision? Judging from the feed from Benghazi, they were happy with getting a NFZ. It might not be the miracle they expect, but it certainly boosted their morale. e: Also they really like France now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 07:38
|
|
|
pwnyXpress posted:Ok, pages of speculation on what's going to happen, but what are the Libyan people's reactions to this decision?
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 07:38
|
|
|
pwnyXpress posted:Ok, pages of speculation on what's going to happen, but what are the Libyan people's reactions to this decision? Well Benghazi was jubilant and celebratory. But I haven't read reactions anywhere else (no access to twitter here.) Paging Brown Moses to the thread.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 07:39
|
|
|
Slantedfloors posted:Cheering and celebratory flag-waving/gun-firing in Benghazi and Tobruk. They, like most people, may not realize that a NFZ involves bombing ground installations, however. The whole situation is still very unpredictable and it remains to be seen how the countries participating in the NFZ will operate. It could range from just taking out anti-air and aircraft capabilities to straight up bombing Khadaffi's forces from the text of the resolution.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 07:42
|
|
|
Theres one big thing in favor of the rebels though IMO. They only have to kill one man right? Does GQ have a 2nd in command that would want to continue on being an insane person? This thing started because he wanted to be able to kill his people for peaceful protesting.... Not exactly a great cause to fight for once hes gone. I imagine most of the army would say gently caress it and defect. In most other wars theres usually enough people in command where killing one doesnt pretty much end it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 08:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 03:56 |
|
|
sweeptheleg posted:In most other wars theres usually enough people in command where killing one doesnt pretty much end it. Libya's governmental system, the Jamahiriya, was set up by Ghadaffi specifically so that there is no challenger to power. All federal power comes directly from him, and he has no designated successors and no one directly in line behind him. He is technically in charge of every aspect of government, while professing to have no power (because there is literally no government beyond some tribal and muncipal agencies that have no actual sway in how things are run outside their tiny areas of influence, and the national government which is supposed to be "independant" and just "taking suggestions" from the ETERNAL LEADER OF THE REVOLUTION). Any tribal/municipal decision can be vetoed by the presidency with no appeal. There aren't even any generals in the Army, technically. For all intents and purposes, Ghadaffi is the Libyan government.
|
|
#
?
Mar 18, 2011 08:08
|
|